Also known as:Daubert standard · Daubert test · Daubert · Daubert rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard governing the admissibility of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 that requires federal courts to act as gatekeepers ensuring the testimony is both relevant and reliable. Reliability is assessed through a flexible case-specific inquiry that may consider factors such as testing, peer review, error rate, controlling standards, and general acceptance. The doctrine extends to all forms of expert testimony based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
3
Gatekeeping Reliability Assessment
Dominic Drake sued Davenport Pharmaceuticals after suffering organ damage allegedly caused by a new medication. Davenport offered an expert who relied on an internal simulation model never tested outside the company or subjected to peer review. The district court conducted a Daubert hearing and excluded the testimony because the model lacked validation and produced an unacceptably high analytical gap between the data and the expert's conclusions about causation.
Abuse of Discretion Review
Dylan Duffy sued Delta Dynamics after a workplace accident involving allegedly defective machinery. Delta's expert concluded the machine met industry standards based on limited internal tests that produced results inconsistent with the accident facts. The district court excluded the testimony for an impermissible analytical gap. On appeal the circuit court affirmed, holding that the exclusion decision fell within the trial court's discretion.
Put it into practice
Test Yourself
9
Practice Questions4
· 3 primary sources
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Study Supplements
Application to Technical Experts
Dolores Diaz sued Desert Oil after an explosion at a refinery. Desert Oil offered an engineer who used a proprietary computational model to opine that equipment design played no role. The district court applied the reliability factors to the engineering testimony even though it rested on technical rather than purely scientific methods. The court admitted the testimony after finding the model's underlying principles sufficiently validated for the specialized field.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
Does the Daubert doctrine apply only to scientific experts or also to engineers and other technical specialists?+
The doctrine applies to all expert testimony based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. Courts must conduct a flexible reliability inquiry regardless of whether the expertise is labeled hard science or engineering.
What standard of review applies when a district court excludes expert testimony under the Daubert doctrine?+
Appellate courts review the district court's decision for abuse of discretion. The trial judge's gatekeeping determination receives substantial deference even when reasonable judges might reach different conclusions on the same record.
May a court exclude expert testimony because the expert's conclusions rest on an analytical gap between the data and the opinion offered?+
Yes. When the expert's conclusions are not supported by sufficient facts or reliable methodology, the court may find too great an analytical gap and exclude the testimony on that basis.
Must every Daubert factor be satisfied before expert testimony is admissible?+
No. The factors are illustrative and nonexclusive. Courts retain discretion to consider any appropriate indicia of reliability and need not apply the factors rigidly or require satisfaction of every one.
EvidenceRelevancy and reasons for excluding relevant evidence · Expert testimonyUBEIntermediate